The applicant police service sought judicial review of a decision by the Ontario Civilian Police Commission, which had reduced a disciplinary penalty imposed on a police officer from an 18-month demotion to a 40-hour forfeiture.
The Commission had found that the Hearing Officer erred by punishing the officer twice for the same actions (insubordination and discreditable conduct) and by failing to ensure consistency of disposition with a comparator case.
The Divisional Court held that the Commission's decision was unreasonable, as it misapplied the Kienapple principle by failing to consider the lack of legal nexus between the offences, and misapprehended the facts of the comparator case.
The Commission's decision was set aside and the Hearing Officer's penalty was restored.
